Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Halse version

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • [QUOTE=Simon Wood;209303]

    Let us instead consider all the complicated and convoluted excuses that have been weaved for why this crock of nonsense should be believed.
    /QUOTE]


    Hello Simon,

    the same consideration could be given to Halse's comment that the infamous chalked writing was 'recently done'. Now how can a policeman possibly tell how old the writing is in a dark entrance on dark brickwork with only a hand held lamp to guide hìm? If Halse hadnt been there at any time before on his beat- he cannot possibly know the 'age' of the chalk writing?


    Ask any teacher to walk into a schoolroom he hasnt previously visited and tell you the age of the chalk writing on the board- in broad daylight. He cant. Unless

    a) the writing gives a 'time' clue- "Kilroy was'ere 30-9-88"
    b) he had previously seen the writing (which raises all sorts of questions)
    c) he saw Kilroy writing it at some time
    d) he wrote it himself
    e) he is an expert analasist in chalk writing.

    and another little point that jabs away at Ritz-sized strange commentary.Our dear old friend Chief Inspector Donald Swanson wrote of the chalk writing, in his report to the Home Office 6-11-88, in which HE states, according to the "facts known to the Met Police respecting the murder in Mitre square and writing on the wall" the following:-

    "Upon the discovery of the blurred chalk writing on the wall..."

    Now- the writing- which Swanson had also deemed the 2nd word (juwes) mis-spelled, is now blurred. Lets suppose the ever reliable Swanson, who had been specifically appointed to be in charge of the whole investigation- with every report at his fingertips(nothing was to be sent anywhere without Swanson seeing it first)- is correct. The writing was blurred. Can somebody please explain to THIS daily chalk user how Halse could possibly call blurred chalk writing as "recently done"?

    Sir Charles Warren, in HIS report of the same day (Lög and Arnold wrote their reports the same day btw)- wrote:-

    "... i arrived at Leman St station shortly before 5am..I accordingly went down to Goulston Street at once... A discussion took place whether the writing covld be left covered up or otherwise ...could be left for an hour until it could be photographed.." " the writing was on the jamb of the open archway or doorway visible to anybody in the street and could not be covered up without danger of the covering being torn off at once"

    Well Mr.Warren- according to Inspector James McWilliam of the City Polie in HIS report to the Home Office dated 29-10-88, he states that he ordered the writing to be photographed WAY before Warren arrived at GS, whilst at Mitre Square in the company of Major Smith and others- having arrived there via Bishopsgate Station from the Detective Office, where he arrived at 3.45am.
    Oh, and Mr. Warren- if the writing WAS visible to "anybody" from the street- they had damnf good eyesight- given the size of the writing- ESPECIALLY if the man in charge said it was blurred! And one more thing Mr Warren- ever heard of a policeman or two to stand guard in front of the covered writing whilst waiting for a photographer?

    "They evidently want to tell us nothing" - CM Oct 30

    hope you enjoyed that lot Simon. The Ritz? Make that Tower Bridge.

    Kindly

    Phil



    ".
    Last edited by Phil Carter; 03-04-2012, 12:41 AM.
    Chelsea FC. TRUE BLUE. 💙


    Justice for the 96 = achieved
    Accountability? ....

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
      The LVP cops were certainly thorough.

      Not only did they erase the GSG. They then went on to obfuscate details of its location, content, meaning, spelling, grammar and linage.

      Why aren't we smelling a rat?

      There's no rat to smell, Simon. This is just another example of the genius of the British ruling class. Serious social disorder was forestalled by use of a duster.

      And while I'm here, the Long and Halse versions mean EXACTLY the same thing (whatever that might be) as I said before on this thread.
      allisvanityandvexationofspirit

      Comment


      • Hi Chrisgeorge,
        I understand your argument to a point, however we are talking about very basic policing here, for instance copying a message should not be that hard to do.

        best wishes.

        Comment


        • I'm sure the police of 2012 would figure it out. . . maybe. But we are talking about 1888 when the police and conditions on the ground were vastly different.

          Chris
          Christopher T. George
          Organizer, RipperCon #JacktheRipper-#True Crime Conference
          just held in Baltimore, April 7-8, 2018.
          For information about RipperCon, go to http://rippercon.com/
          RipperCon 2018 talks can now be heard at http://www.casebook.org/podcast/

          Comment


          • Originally posted by spyglass View Post
            Were the police really that inept?...All of them?
            Hi Spyglass, not the City Police in that instance.

            Comment


            • Inspector Clouseau springs to mind!

              Comment


              • Originally posted by spyglass View Post
                Inspector Clouseau springs to mind!
                Inspector "blurred" Clouseau? Or simply Mr Magoo?


                Kindly

                Phil
                Chelsea FC. TRUE BLUE. 💙


                Justice for the 96 = achieved
                Accountability? ....

                Comment


                • Clouseau would have brought the man to justice. See Anderson's comments on the French police.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Phil Carter View Post
                    Inspector "blurred" Clouseau? Or simply Mr Magoo?


                    Kindly

                    Phil
                    Hi Phil, Warren's "blurred graffito" is memorable, I must say.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by DVV View Post
                      Clouseau would have brought the man to justice. See Anderson's comments on the French police.
                      Hello David,

                      good point-Magoo it is then- but Clouseau still mis-pronounced "monkey" as "minkey" and room as "ruem"- which explains "juwes" nicely, LOL

                      kindly

                      Phil
                      Chelsea FC. TRUE BLUE. 💙


                      Justice for the 96 = achieved
                      Accountability? ....

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by DVV View Post
                        Hi Phil, Warren's "blurred graffito" is memorable, I must say.
                        Hello David,

                        I think you mean Swanson's blurred graffiti, non?

                        Kindly

                        Phil
                        Chelsea FC. TRUE BLUE. 💙


                        Justice for the 96 = achieved
                        Accountability? ....

                        Comment


                        • Chris,

                          You must realise that the armchair dective of today, sitting in rain sodden California or Frost bitten Norway, are far more skilled than a PC in dank Whitechapel of 1888.

                          These people have gotten off their arses, fired up their bullseye lamps and seen for themselves how difficult it is to view with them. They have then stood at the spot themselves at night to experience the texture of the wall and researched into depth actual procedure along with the reports and police orders.

                          These Guys know what they are talking about.

                          Monty
                          Monty

                          https://forum.casebook.org/core/imag...t/evilgrin.gif

                          Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.

                          http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622

                          Comment


                          • Yes, Phil, Swanson. My mistake.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by DVV View Post
                              Yes, Phil, Swanson. My mistake.
                              Hello David,

                              One of the problems for anybody like Simon or myself is that when WE present factual evidence, such has been done- the facts cannot be argued with. Swanson, Warren, McWilliam, Halse all wrote down what they did.

                              it's inarguable. McWijiam ordered the writing photograhed way before Warren even got to Goulston Street. Swanson wrote 'blurred'. Warren didnt see that the writing could not be covered up and guarded by a couple of policemen (simple, quiet solution to the problem, even by 1888 standards of securing a site) and Halse really did claim to know that the chalk writing was recent when it is impossible to tell such a thing in 1888...without knowing it was recent.

                              And if you put that lot together, you have one heck of a problem- because they cant all be right, inept, mistaken or telling porkies.

                              I dont pretend to know the truth about this- but it does raise good questions all round. And if there was something untoward going on, then the worst thing we can do is ignore the possibility.


                              Kindly

                              Phil
                              Chelsea FC. TRUE BLUE. 💙


                              Justice for the 96 = achieved
                              Accountability? ....

                              Comment


                              • Hi Phil.
                                Swanson, to the best of my memory, never appeared at Goulston St., so his opinion of the condition of the writing must have been taken from police reports handed to him. Our problem is not knowing which Met. PC present at the scene gave that opinion, the Inspector, or PC 190?, or someone else.

                                On the other hand, Halse was present, yet, how we interpret "recent" will depend on whether we believe the killer wrote it.
                                Recent, could mean anything from minutes to days. So long as no-one brushed against the wall, chalk writing will not look 'worn', 'blurred' or 'dated'.
                                You should know yourself just how long chalk writing can remain legible so long as it remains untouched.

                                Regards, Jon S.
                                Regards, Jon S.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X